If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Originally Posted by jonathan

This link is to Girolami's guttation fluid experiment.
HFCS is not made from guttation droplets!

And your point is? Nobody's claimed that HFCS was made from guttation droplets. However, there's precisely zero question that the bees feed from guttation droplets, and these studies show the mass amounts of neonicotinoids that are found in those droplets. Thus, the Harvard study used that dosage level to test the bees. I am honestly confounded on how any of this is confusing to anyone...

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Originally Posted by Javin007

.... and these studies show the mass amounts of neonicotinoids that are found in those droplets.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't _all_ the corn plants in that [corn guttation] study in containers (even the ones n the field, if I remember correctly)? Would one expect to find the same amount of systemic seed treatment in guttation of plants that are planted in the ground (like corn) and plants that are confined to a tiny amount of soil in a small container? It doesn't seem like a reasonable assumption to me.

But even the most ardent anti-neonic voices have stopped talking about this [the harvard] study...for good reason.

deknow

Last edited by deknow; 03-23-2013 at 09:17 PM.
Reason: clarified in brackets

Sometimes the lights all shining on me
Other times I can barely see. -The Grateful Dead

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Originally Posted by Javin007

However, there's precisely zero question that the bees feed from guttation droplets.

In fact there is no evidence at all that they do collect water from guttation droplets as far as I know.
I imagine it is possible, perhaps when there is no alternate water source, but it is certainly not a habitual activity of bees. Anyway, bees tend to avoid a food or water source when it is contaminated due to the repellent effect of a pesticide at higher levels. Various researchers have noted this for Imidacloprid.
Someone posted a video on you tube of a bee collecting water from droplets but there was no evidence that the water droplets were even guttation droplets.
Guttation droplets can contain very high levels of systemic pesticide but if bees are not taking water from them there is not actually a problem for bees.
With corn, the problem for bees is planter dust clouds during seed drilling.

The Girolami experiment was a lab study which fed dehydrated caged bees syrup laced with pesticide via pipette.
ie it is another study which demonstrates that insecticide kills insects efficiently at high dosage but shows little else.

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Originally Posted by jonathan

In fact there is no evidence at all that they do collect water from guttation droplets as far as I know.
I imagine it is possible, perhaps when there is no alternate water source, but it is certainly not a habitual activity of bees. Anyway, bees tend to avoid a food or water source when it is contaminated due to the repellent effect of a pesticide at higher levels. Various researchers have noted this for Imidacloprid.
Someone posted a video on you tube of a bee collecting water from droplets but there was no evidence that the water droplets were even guttation droplets.
Guttation droplets can contain very high levels of systemic pesticide but if bees are not taking water from them there is not actually a problem for bees.
With corn, the problem for bees is planter dust clouds during seed drilling.

The Girolami experiment was a lab study which fed dehydrated caged bees syrup laced with pesticide via pipette.
ie it is another study which demonstrates that insecticide kills insects efficiently at high dosage but shows little else.

Guttation droplets are not a water source. They are a nectar source. They have the same molecular make-up of nectar - high in sugar, various enzymes, etc. And even if someone showed a THOUSAND videos of bees drinking from guttation (such as this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMhguEp7qN4) or a THOUSAND videos of bees collecting corn pollen (such as this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLsLnC8W5DI) the folks that, for some bizzare reason, actively want to ignore the fact that it's our own pesticides, fungicides, and herbicides causing these problems will continue to do so, making statements such as "bees ignore corn" while the sheep nod their heads in agreement. I'm done wasting my time here.

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Originally Posted by Ian

>>'m done wasting my time here.<<

hmmm, thanks for posting bud.
I was actually reading some of it but looks like you cant participate in a two sided conversation

That would make sense if the conversation was actually two-sided vs. a bunch of pro-pesticide'ers saying such as, "Bees ignore corn." and "Bees don't drink guttation." I'm not going to waste my time arguing against statements as absurd as this.

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Originally Posted by Javin007

That would make sense if the conversation was actually two-sided vs. a bunch of pro-pesticide'ers saying such as, "Bees ignore corn." and "Bees don't drink guttation." I'm not going to waste my time arguing against statements as absurd as this.

So I gather you commonly observe this? Was it in an area in which the only nectar/pollen producing species was field corn?

Last edited by Barry; 03-24-2013 at 04:50 PM.

"If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve."
- W.T.S.

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Originally Posted by hpm08161947

So I gather you commonly observe this? Was it in an area in which the only nectar/pollen producing species was field corn?

Yes, as I am saying I commonly observe this. As does everyone ELSE who has ever grown corn or who doesn't have some strange "I love pesticides" blinders on. And no, that was not the only nectar/pollen producing species. I can't even believe I'm having to address this.

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Originally Posted by Javin007

Yes, as I am saying I commonly observe this. As does everyone ELSE who has ever grown corn or who doesn't have some strange "I love pesticides" blinders on. And no, that was not the only nectar/pollen producing species. I can't even believe I'm having to address this.

Try to calm down, no one is trying to harm you.

I wonder if you are talking about garden corn... or what we call sweet corn... I do occasionally see bees on sweet corn.

Just so you will know... you are not talking to a city dweller.

Last edited by Barry; 03-24-2013 at 04:52 PM.

"If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve."
- W.T.S.

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Guttation droplets are not a water source. They are a nectar source. They have the same molecular make-up of nectar - high in sugar, various enzymes, etc.

Not the case. Guttation fluids are low in sugars, usually under 5% whereas nectar is more like 30%

Guttation fluid is generally low in
sugar content, and thus not highly attractive for foraging
honey bees. However, water collecting in honey
bees is intensive in arid regions and it is unclear to
what degree ephemeral and rare sources such as guttation
would be used over more permanent water

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

I have a yard close to some sweet corn. My bees are in it a lot at tassel time. I have a yard adjacent to a large field of silage corn. I never see my bees in it although they often are flying over it to get to other forage. I have NEVER seen a bee drinking guttation fluid from either source. And I have looked. Also my bees are doing pretty nicely next to that field of corn. Experience trumps all the studies for me about neonics. I have seen the devastation that the organophosphates do to hives at times. Never seen that with the neonics.

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

I would agree with that. But even the 5% mark is highly variable depending on how much water has been available to the plant. But that also doesn't make guttation attractive just as "a water source."

This is the last I have to say on the subject. I promise. But the neonicotinoids (read: poisons we know for a fact kill bees) are not ONLY found in the guttation, but in the pollen and nectar in large amounts as well:

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Originally Posted by Javin007

This is the last I have to say on the subject. I promise. But the neonicotinoids (read: poisons we know for a fact kill bees) are not ONLY found in the guttation, but in the pollen and nectar in large amounts as well:

High concentrations of neonicotinoids in corn (as well as other moncrops) do not bother me a great deal, but I would be interested if they were found in: fetterbush, clethra, sumac, button bush, zenobia, gallberry and several other bay/swamp dwellers....

"If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve."
- W.T.S.

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

I would agree with that. But even the 5% mark is highly variable depending on how much water has been available to the plant. But that also doesn't make guttation attractive just as "a water source."

This is the last I have to say on the subject. I promise. But the neonicotinoids (read: poisons we know for a fact kill bees) are not ONLY found in the guttation, but in the pollen and nectar in large amounts as well:

Blacquiere is one of the more sober commentators so I would recommend that last link you posted.

It's not true though that neonicotinoids are found in pollen and nectar in large amounts. They are found in pollen and nectar in small (ppb) amounts whereas in guttation fluid the concentration could be 1000 times higher than that.
The key thing is that bees barely bother with guttation fluid so that is not a major issue.

This entire argument about safety of neonicotinoids and whether they should have been approved in the first place or should be banned now hinges on exposure levels.
Pollen and nectar are obviously both attractive to bees so if there is a problem with pollen or nectar then there is a problem with the pesticide.
Canada grows over 7.5 million hectares of Canola every year and the Canadian beekeepers bring their bees to that crop to bring in the nectar and make honey. The bees collect the pollen and the nectar, build up well, and the beekeeper sells the honey surplus.
The minimal levels of neonicotinoid residue in this pollen and nectar collected does not appear to cause problems. If it did, there would be no bees left in Canada by now and I believe there are still plenty.
There are some problems with neonicotinoids, such as planter dust during seed drilling of corn but neither guttation water, nor pollen, nor nectar seems to be a significant issue for honey bees. It may be a different story and a different level of risk for other pollinators such as solitary bees but this is a honey bee forum so people are discussing the issue from the perspective of the impact on honey bees.

Re: Beekeepers suing EPA

Originally Posted by Javin007

Yes, as I am saying I commonly observe this. As does everyone ELSE who has ever grown corn or who doesn't have some strange "I love pesticides" blinders on. And no, that was not the only nectar/pollen producing species. I can't even believe I'm having to address this.

Javin,

I have to say I have never seen bees forage on guttation on corn. I don't love pesticides. I realize that farmers choose to use them to product their crops from pests.

Corn produces guttation under very specific and uncommon environmental conditions. So, it is not regulalry available for bees to forage on.

I have a bee yard that is literally surrounded by corn every other year. There are hundreds/thousands of acres of corn within the foraging area of this bee yard. Others on Beesource have commented on their hives being located in close proximity to corn. While anecdotal, these reports include thousands and thousands of hives located near corn without massive, pesticide related die-offs.

There is no question about the toxicity of neonics to bees. The problem comes in bees exposure, or lack there of, to the neonics.

What is suing the EPA going to do? Result in noenics being banned? Unlikely. But, what if they are? What happens then? Are farmes going to stop using crop protection chemicals to protect their crops from pests? No! What chemicals are they going to use? Are those chemicals going to be safer for bees/pollinators? Are these products going to be as effective, both cost and crop protection wise? What will be the impact to food production/food costs? Could there be any backlash towards beekeepers seeking to place hives on farmers' land who have been impacted by the loss of neonics?

While banning neonics sounds like a great idea on the surface, there are a plethora of potential unintended consquences that mey, or may not be better for bees and the beekeeper.